A.In many modern
versions of the Bible, these words are found between Mark 16:8 and Mark 16:9.

“The
most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark
16:9-20” (NIV).

B.Others
will place a footnote at verse 9. The footnote may read as follows: “Some of
the oldest mss. omit from verse 9 through 20” (NASV).

C.This is the footnote for verse 20 in the NKJV: “Verses 9-10 are
bracketed in the NU-Text as not original. They are lacking in the Codex
Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, although nearly all other manuscripts of Mark
contain them.”

D.Many Greek texts that are used to translate the modern versions have
been heavily influenced by the Codex Sinaiticus and the Codex Vaticanus. The
main reason is because of the early date of these two codices.

E.Let’s look at both of the codices briefly in this lesson.

I.THE CODEX SINAITICUS

II.THE CODEX VATICANUS

A.The Vaticanus is another fourth century manuscript of the Greek Bible.

1.It is an uncial (written in all capital letters).

2.It was also written in Koine Greek.

B.It is named after its place of conservation in the Vatican Library where
is has been kept since the 15th century.

1.It was recorded in the library’s earliest catalog in 1475 on shelf
number 1209.

2.Textual critics refer to the codex as “B.”

C.The Vaticanus came to light in the 16th century as a
consequence of the correspondence between Erasmus and the prefects of the
Vatican Library.

D.This codex differs greatly from the Textus Receptus. The Vaticanus was
used by Wescott and Hort in their edition, The New Testament in the Original
Greek.

2.All of the Apocrypha except I – IV Maccabees and the Prayer of Manasseh.

3.It contains all of the New Testament books except I & II Timothy,
Titus, Philemon, and Revelation.

4.There are numerous verses from the New Testament that are not found in
the Vaticanus as well.

a.Matthew 12:47; 16:2b-3; 17:21; 18:11; 23:14

b.Mark 7:16; 9:44, 46; 11:26; 15:28

c.Mark 16:9-20. The end of Mark in the Vaticanus contains an empty column
after verse 16:8, possibly suggesting that the scribe was aware of the missing
ending. It is the only empty New Testament column in the Codex.

d.Luke 17:36; 22:43-44

e.John 5:4; John 7:53-8:11

f.Acts 8:37; 15:35; 24:7; 28:29

g.Romans 16:24

h.I Peter 5:3

5.NOTE: Partial verses are also omitted in the Vaticanus (Ex., “For thine
is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory, for ever. Amen,” Matt. 6:13).

F.The Vaticanus was held in high esteem after it was brought to light.
The discovery of the Sinaiticus helped to solidify the Vaticanus because they
are from the same time period and are very similar in nature.

III.THE DEBATE OVER THESE TWO CODICES

A.The debate over these two codices centers upon age versus majority of
manuscipts.

1.The KJV was translated based upon the majority of the manuscripts.

2.The modern translations were translated based upon the age of the
manuscripts.

There are varying
theories on how these ancient texts should be viewed by modern scholars. On one
hand, some believe that the most ancient reading should be followed, as it is
closest in time to the original. On the other hand, some believe that the
majority should rule. Since there are thousands of ancient manuscripts, they
believe we should give precedence to the reading that is represented by the
most documents. One issue that is sometimes raised against the majority
viewpoint is that many of those documents were written very late (9th-15th
century). The answer to this is that many of the early papyrus fragments support
the majority reading. Additionally, the question has been raised, “If Vaticanus
and Sinaiticus represent the original reading of the text, why are there so few
manuscripts that follow their lead?” If they were valued by the early church,
you would expect to find many copies made from them, covering a wide period of
history. What we actually find is a few early manuscripts which agree with
them, but then a disappearance of that text type as we progress through
history.

Answer: The Majority Text, also known as the Byzantine and Ecclesiastical
Text, is a method of determining the original reading of a Scripture by
discovering what reading occurs in a majority of the manuscripts. As the Greek
New Testament was copied hundreds of times over 1500 years, the scribes, as
careful as they were, occasionally made mistakes. The vast majority of these
mistakes are in misspellings, or in whether "the" or a preposition
occurs. It is important to remember, though, that no doctrine of the Christian
faith is put into doubt by these textual questions. The testimony of the
thousands of manuscripts over 1500 years is entirely consistent on all the key
issues of the Christian faith.

It is vital, though, that our Bibles are as accurate as possible. The accuracy
of the manuscripts plays a large role in determining the accuracy of the
translation. While the presence of a the is not usually vital to the meaning of
a verse, there are times when it can be. This is where the science of “textual criticism” comes in. The goal of
textual criticism is to examine all of the available manuscripts, and by
comparison and contrast, to determine what the original text truly was.

The Majority Text method within textual criticism could be called the
“democratic” method. Essentially, each Greek manuscript has one vote, all the
variants are voted on by all the manuscripts, and whichever variant has the
most votes wins. At first glance, the Majority Text method would seem to be the
most likely to result in the correct original reading. The problem is that the
Majority Text method does not take into account two very important factors: (1)
The age of the manuscripts, and (2) the location of the manuscripts.

(1) The age of the manuscripts. The more times a manuscript is copied,
the more likely it is that errors will occur. A first-generation copy——one that
was copied directly from the original——is very likely to be closer to the
original than a tenth-generation copy (a copy that was copied from a copy, from
a copy . . . from the original). Manuscripts from the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th
centuries should be far closer to the originals than manuscripts from the 12th,
13th, and 14th centuries. The problem is that the majority of the manuscripts
are from the 12th, 13th, and 14th centuries. To illustrate, let’s say there is
a man named James Smith. Let’s say you are attempting to discover James Smith’s
middle name. Who would be a better source, James Smith’s one thousand great-great-great-great-great-grandchildren,
or James Smith’s son? Of course it would be James Smith’s son. Similarly, a
2nd- or 3rd-generation copy of the New Testament is far more likely to be
correct than a 12th- or 13th-generation copy.

(2) The location of the manuscripts. The vast majority of Christians
through the centuries have lived in western and eastern Europe. For cultural,
theological, and political reasons, the western and eastern churches split. The
western church became the Roman Catholic Church while the eastern church become
the Orthodox Church. A few centuries after the start of Christianity, the
western church began using Latin as its primary language. The eastern church
continued using Greek as its primary language for another thousand years (and
in some places, even to today). Textual critics have discovered that the
manuscripts discovered in one part of the world tend to be very similar to
other manuscripts from that part of the world, likely due to originating from
the same source. Since the eastern church continued using Greek as its primary
language for 1000+ years longer than the western church, there are
significantly more Greek manuscripts that were discovered in eastern Europe
than in western Europe. And, these eastern Greek manuscripts (the Byzantine
manuscripts) are all very similar to each other. When the Majority Text is
applied, this results in the eastern manuscripts having far greater weight than
the western manuscripts. However, if the thousands of Latin manuscripts from
the western church were thrown into the Majority Text “equation,” the results
of the voting would be far more balanced, and would actually tilt away from the
eastern / Byzantine reading.

Perhaps another illustration will help. Let’s say that there are two copies of
a document, document A and document B, with minor differences between them due
to copying mistakes. Document A is copied 100 times, while Document B is copied
three times. If you used the Majority Text method, the Document A copies would
have 100 votes, while the Document B copies would only have 3 votes. The
Document A copies would win every vote. However, since Document A and Document
B are both first-generation copies of another document, Document A and Document
B and their "descendants" should be given equal weight in determining
the most likely original reading.

The principles of age and location, then, result in “the majority rules” not
being the best method in textual criticism. What, then, is the best method? The
best method would seem to be taking into account all factors: majority, age,
location, difficulty of the reading, and which variant best explains the origin
of the other variants. This method is known as the “Eclectic Text” or “Critical
Text.” Other than the King James Version and New King James Version, all of the
modern English translations are based on the Eclectic Text. Most assume that
the King James Version and New King James Version are based on the Majority
Text. This is not correct.

The King James Version and New King James Version are based on the Textus Receptus. The Textus Receptus is
very similar to the Majority Text, but there are in fact hundreds of
differences between the Majority Text and the Textus Receptus. The Textus
Receptus was compiled and edited by Erasmus in the 16th century. Erasmus used
several Greek manuscripts, which were eastern / Byzantine in nature. This
explains why the Textus Receptus is very similar to the Majority Text. However,
Erasmus by no means had access to all of the Greek manuscripts, so there was no
way he could develop a true Majority Text. The Textus Receptus is based on a
very limited number of manuscripts, all of them eastern, and all of them dating
to around the 12th century. As a result, compared to the Electic Text and the
Majority Text, the Textus Receptus is far less likely to have the most accurate
reading.

To summarize, the Majority Text is a method within textual criticism that uses
the “majority rules” to determine which variant is most likely to be original.
While the Majority Text method does result in the most likely original reading
in most instances, it should not be employed universally or exclusively. There
are many other important factors in determining which variant is most likely to
be original.

CONCLUSION

A.Those who are
proponents of the KJV argue against the modern versions from two standpoints:
1) the omissions from the text, and 2) the accuracy of the translation.

B.Those
who argue for the modern translations do so from several standpoints.

1.The KJV does not take into account the earlies manuscripts, namely, the
Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus.

2.The KJV has language in it that is archaic, that is, out of date.

C.Some
important points to remember.

1.Any translation of the Scripture that is accurately brought over from
the Greek into the English is the inspired Word of God.

2.The omissions from the Greek text by the ancient manuscripts account for
a .006 difference between the texts (44 omitted verses divided into the 7957
verses found in the NT).

3.Every version of the Bible has its strengths and weaknesses. These will
be debated in our upcoming studies.

4.Every individual has a line that he draws when it comes to which
versions he accepts and rejects.

5.The multiplicity of versions that exist has nothing to do with the
“need” for a modern translation. It is due to the desire of the publishing
companies to make money off of the Word of God.

6.There are some versions that should be rejected because

a.They are not accurately translated.

b.They have false doctrine injected into the translation.

c.They are not written in a manner that is respectful of the Word of God.

7.Having many versions being read in a Bible class can bring confusion to
the Bible study because of the difference in the translation. (See Handout)

“·Be careful! When you do good
things, don’t do them [or Be careful not to do/parade your righteous
deeds] in front of people to be ·seen [noticed] by them. If you do that, you
will ·have no [lose the] reward from your Father in heaven.

1 Alms. 5
Prayer. 14 Forgiving our brother. 16 Fasting. 19 Our
treasure. 20 We must succor the poor. 24 God and riches. 25
Careful seeking for meat and drink, and apparel, forbidden. 33 The
kingdom of God and his righteousness. Take heed that ye give not your alms
before men to be seen of them, or else ye shall have no reward of your Father
which is in heaven.

Be careful that you don’t
practice your tzedakah (charity giving) before Bnei Adam in order to varf (show
off, flaunt) to be seen by Bnei Adam; for then you have no sachar (reward) with
your Av shbaShomayim.

Jesus: But when you do
these righteous acts, do not do them in front of spectators. Don’t do
them where you can be seen, let alone lauded, by others. If you do, you
will have no reward from your Father in heaven.

Take heed, that ye do not your
rightwiseness before men, to be seen of them, else ye shall have no need at
your Father that is in heavens [else ye shall not have need of your Father
which is in heavens].